1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to a device and process for changing oil from an internal combustion engine, automatic transmission, or similar application in an environmentally safe, completely clean, quick, cost effective, and simple manner.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Changing engine or transmission fluid is a dirty, dangerous task performed millions of times each day by ordinary, unskilled people. The process of changing fluids is crude and rudimentary. It is almost impossible to perform a clean job, without hurting the environment or yourself Over one million gallons of used motor oil are improperly disposed of each year in South Carolina alone. Think of how many are disposed of all over the United States, or even the world! Just one gallon of used motor oil is enough to contaminate one million gallons of water! Additionally, exposure to dirty oil has been proven to contribute to cancer.
To change oil at home, the vehicle must be raised and the customer has to get underneath to service the drain plug and the filter. The vehicle, weighing up to several tons, many times is not properly supported by jack stands. This places the customer in a dangerous, potentially fatal position. The oil must be drained from the oil pan, caught in a catch pail, and the filter changed without spilling dirty oil. Spilled oil contaminates the environment when it is wiped up and the oily rags are improperly disposed. Many times the used oil is stored in improper containers never to be recycled. It finds its way into the environment by being poured out onto the ground or down the drain. The empty oil containers are an environmental hazard, taking up space in landfills and leaking oil into our environment. The entire oil changing process can take up to twenty minutes for someone who is experienced, much longer for someone who is not. Inevitably, the customer is frustrated and filthy with carcinogenic oil. He has placed himself and the environment in danger. Inevitably, he has done some harm to our environment.
For those customers who do not have the expertise to change their own oil or do not desire the frustration associated with doing it themselves, their only option is to pay someone else to do it for them. For a customer to change their oil at a typical quick-stop oil change center, they can expect several things. First, they can expect to spend about thirty dollars every three thousand miles. They can also expect to be pressured to purchase extra services. However, these are not the biggest drawbacks to paying someone else to change your oil.
The biggest drawback to these quick-stop oil change services is the inherent inconvenience. The only times it is convenient to service a vehicle are the same times that are convenient for everyone else. This leads to long waiting lines, effectively reducing the quick-stop oil change services' convenience. A customer can expect to wait in line for at least thirty minutes. It is not until they make it through the waiting line that the service only takes the advertised ten minutes. A typical customer does not have the time to service their car on the way to work because the lines would make them late for work. Lunch is not convenient because of the short time available, and again there are the lunch hour lines to deal with. A customer does not want to fight the rush hour business and wait in line a half-hour or more on their way home after a long day of work either. The weekends are available, but the quick-stop service centers are busy then also and who wants to waste what little free time they have waiting in line? They therefore typically put it off as long as possible, wearing out their vehicle prematurely due to improper fluid service intervals. Additionally, despite service garages' efforts to maintain clean operations, they lack the proper tools and equipment to perform a clean, environmentally safe job.
There have been attempts at making the oil change process better. U.S. Pat. No. 5,209,198 describes a device and method of changing motor oil in an internal combustion engine. This device and method still suffer from many ailments, mainly environmental stewardship. It allows the environment to be harmed by spilled dirty oil. This device has no means of recovering the dirty oil that dribbles from the oil filter during its change. Further, an additional amount of dirty oil will always escape during the connection and disconnection of the quick change couplers attaching the pump device. The environment is therefore still at risk with this system
U.S. Pat. No. 5,209,198 is overly complex for a typical customer to operate. Different valves have to be opened and closed at certain times to drain the engine, flush it, and refill it with oil. A typical customer needs a simple process so as to ensure they will properly service their vehicle. This method's complex nature could easily confuse a customer and allow them to accidentally fill their engine with flushing fluid rather than oil. The results of an improper oil change can be catastrophic engine failure within a few minutes. This will always prove to be costly.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,209,198 also can put unfiltered oil through the lubrication system of the engine. This unfiltered oil is pumped into the lubrication system through the same conduits and pump that evacuate the dirty oil and flushing solvent from the engine. These conduits and pump will become contaminated over time, contaminating the clean oil before it is pumped into the engine. Additionally, the complexity of the system makes it expensive to produce, complex to employ, and still dangerous for the environment. This device fails to solve the age old problems of oil changing.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,151,823 describes a cartridge device for changing oil. This device, however, would prove to be unwieldy to handle. A typical customer would not have the strength or expertise to change their own oil. These cartridges would require major reengineering to adapt them to anything, adding cost and complexity. More expense would be incurred since a customer would have to have access to two of these cartridges, one for the engine and another for recycling. One size cartridge would never fit all applications, so even more complexity would be needed to satisfy every vehicle's requirements. This would prove to be a logistical nightmare. Further, this system provides no means of safely capturing any spilled oil from the self sealing input and output lines during the changing process. Therefore, the environment is still at risk. This device is weighty, costly, unwieldy, complex, logistically perplexing, and still environmentally unsound.
Many other devices and methods have attempted to make oil changing sensible. U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,390,762 (1992), 4,674,456 (1985), 5,426,086 (1991), and all other prior art still suffer from similar disadvantages:
(a) Environmental stewardship: Their devices and methods provide no absolute assurance that the environment will not be adversely affected through the oil change process. Many systems still require oil to be drained into some sort of catch pail. In all of these systems, there is a chance for oil to contaminate the environment. PA1 (b) Expense: Their complexity leads to expensive manufacture and use. This means that manufacturers will be apprehensive to employ such systems. In most cases, these devices require the application to be substantially modified to accommodate them Such reengineering is expensive and is motivation against their adaptation and employment. Costs are further increased in the use of such systems. The cost of an oil change would be comparable to having a specialist do it for you. Special tools and knowledge are required to maintain these systems, driving costs higher. In short, their complexity leads to higher prices through their adaptation to the engine or transmission, their employment, and their maintenance. PA1 (c) Complexity: Their complexity is a further deterrent for the unwary customer to use them properly, or even at all. A typical customer is wary of changing their own oil and deem a complex system as too much for them to handle by themselves. They will then have to resort to the help of an expensive specialist. PA1 (d) Accessibility: These systems would not be practical until widespread market acceptance was established. There would be customers of these systems without any means of maintenance or even changing their oil until the proper logistical distribution system was established. PA1 (e) Dependability: An internal combustion engine's or automatic transmission's lifeblood is its oil. Without a proper level of oil, they will reach catastrophic failure within a matter of seconds. The prior art's complexity means there are more areas for the system to break down and fail. Failure means that the engine or transmission will be harmed, if not destroyed. This is a very expensive error. PA1 (f) Practicality: Because of all the above reasons, all prior art has proven to be impractical. It is environmentally unsound, complex, expensive, inaccessible, unreliable, expensive, logistically challenging, and completely unlikely to be adapted to the market. The prior art's market acceptance has not been anything near significant, meaning that it has been rejected as impractical. PA1 (g) Safety: Through the use of prior art systems, the customer is still put danger by coining in contact with carcinogenic dirty oil. Further, many times the customer is still required to get under a heavy vehicle. A typical customer does not have the tools to properly suspend their vehicle, increasing the danger of the vehicle falling and crushing the customer. PA1 (a) to provide an environmentally safe means of changing oil in an internal combustion engine, automatic transmission, or similar application; PA1 (b) to provide a system that is inexpensive to adapt to any application, requiring no or a negligible amount of modification to the application; PA1 (c) to provide a system that is as simple as possible, allowing any customer to easily change their oil; PA1 (d) to provide a system that allows for a customer to change their oil without depending upon a specialist; PA1 (e) to provide a system that is dependable, and least likely to fail or allow customer error leading to failure; PA1 (f) to provide a system that provides for a low cost oil change; PA1 (g) to provide a system that provides for a fast oil change; PA1 (h) to provide a system that can be serviced anywhere, at any time; PA1 (i) to provide a system that is highly marketable, therefore meeting customer's needs while ensuring acceptance with needed manufacturers; PA1 (j) to provide a system that is safe to operate-that does not place the customer in danger while changing their oil.